On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 04:19:51PM -0200, Tomeu Vizoso wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 11:25, Benjamin M. Schwartz
> <bmschwar at fas.harvard.edu> wrote:
> > Aleksey Lim wrote:
> >> So, I have
> >> strong intension to switching development focus from core team,
> >> which develops sucrose - glucose(core) and fructose(some core
> >> activities) to wide range of developers/doers thus some kind of
> >> decentralization of development process.
> >
> > I agree. I think this has been a central part of the Sugar design
> > philosophy from the beginning. I think your message is very much on the
> > right track.
>> While I think this is in the spirit of my vision for Sugar, my
> experience with how Sugar is being used and deployed _today_ makes it
> quite uninteresting and too invasive to consider for the near future.
>> The current barriers for people to contribute to Sugar development and
> share their work are mostly cultural. We can make the technology a
> thousand times easier to modify, but if people still think that they
> can be only users, we won't gain anything.
>> If we really want more people to realize their power and modify sugar
> and share their work, we need to, in order:
>> - show how the community can address some of their needs, as perceived by them,
>> - show how they can better address the rest of their needs by working
> within the community.
>> The rest is just icing on the top, IMHO.
well, thats all true but it doesn't exclude easy to change and easy to
share possibility of doer's changes e.g. if I want to hack Journal by
adding wallpaper support(and of course want to expose my changes) the
worst way that could be is proposing my changes to core team(e.g. think
about proposing your patches to kernel.org team - maybe exaggerating but
the same level issue). Having ready to use sugarized 0install
environment gives developers easy sharing method.
--
Aleksey